The number of patients with bone metastasis increases as medical management and surgery improve the overall survival of patients with cancer. Bone metastasis can cause skeletal complications, including bone pain, pathological fractures, spinal cord or nerve root compression, and hypercalcemia. Before initiation of treatment for bone metastasis, it is important to exclude primary bone malignancy, which would require a completely different therapeutic approach. It is essential to select surgical methods considering the patient’s prognosis, quality of life, postoperative function, and risk of postoperative complications. Therefore, bone metastasis treatment requires a multidisciplinary team approach, including radiologists, oncologists, and orthopedic surgeons. Recently, many novel palliative treatment options have emerged for bone metastases, such as stereotactic body radiation therapy, radiopharmaceuticals, vertebroplasty, minimally invasive spine stabilization with percutaneous pedicle screws, acetabuloplasty, embolization, thermal ablation techniques, electrochemotherapy, and high-intensity focused ultrasound. These techniques are beneficial for patients who may not benefit from surgery or radiotherapy.

The 2020 World Health Organization classification defined giant cell tumors of bone (GCTBs) as intermediate malignant tumors. Since the mutated H3F3A was found to be a specific marker for GCTB, it has become very useful in diagnosing GCTB. Curettage is the most common treatment for GCTBs. Preoperative administration of denosumab makes curettage difficult and increases the risk of local recurrence. Curettage is recommended to achieve good functional outcomes, even for local recurrence. For pathological fractures, joints should be preserved as much as possible and curettage should be attempted. Preoperative administration of denosumab for pelvic and spinal GCTBs reduces extraosseous lesions, hardens the tumor, and facilitates en bloc resection. Nerve-sparing surgery after embolization is a possible treatment for sacral GCTBS. Denosumab therapy with or without embolization is indicated for inoperable pelvic, spinal, and sacral GCTBs. It is recommended to first observe lung metastases, then administer denosumab for growing lesions. Radiotherapy is associated with a risk of malignant transformation and should be limited to cases where surgery is impossible and denosumab, zoledronic acid, or embolization is not available. Local recurrence after 2 years or more should be indicative of malignant transformation. This review summarizes the treatment approaches for non-malignant and malignant GCTBs.

Background: Denosumab, a monoclonal antibody that binds to receptor activation of nuclear factor-kappa ß ligand (RANKL), has been used as a drug to treat aggressive giant cell tumors of bone. It is unclear whether preoperative denosumab therapy is associated with the local recurrence risk in patients with giant cell tumors of bone treated with curettage. Early evidence suggests that denosumab treatment is associated with a reduction in local recurrence, but other studies have questioned that premise. Curettage after a short course of denosumab (3 to 4 months) has been recommended, especially for large, aggressive giant cell tumors in which complete curettage is difficult to achieve. No randomized studies have documented the benefit of this approach, and some investigators have reported higher local recurrence after denosumab treatment. Due to this confusion, we performed a systematic analysis of existing reports to attempt to answer this question and determine whether the appropriate preoperative denosumab therapy duration could be established. Questions/purposes: (1) Is the use of preoperative denosumab associated with local recurrence risk in patients with giant cell tumors of bone treated with curettage compared with those treated with curettage alone? (2) Is the preoperative denosumab therapy duration associated with local recurrence after curettage? Methods: We searched the PubMed, EMBASE, and CENTRAL databases on April 26, 2019 and included both randomized and non-randomized studies that compared local recurrence between patients who had giant cell tumors of bone and were treated with curettage after preoperative denosumab and patients treated with curettage alone. Two authors independently screened the studies. There were no randomized studies dealing with denosumab in giant cell tumors of bone, and generally, denosumab was used for more aggressive tumors. We assessed the quality of the included studies using the Risk of Bias Assessment tool for Non-randomized Studies, with a moderate overall risk of bias. We registered our protocol in PROSPERO (registration number CRD42019133288). We selected seven eligible studies involving 619 patients for the final analysis. Results: The proportion of patients with local recurrence ranged from 20% to 100% in the curettage with preoperative denosumab group and ranged from 0% to 50% in the curettage-alone group. The odds ratio of local recurrence ranged from 1.07 to 37.80 in no more than 6 months of preoperative denosumab duration group and ranged from 0.60 to 28.33 in more than 6 months of preoperative denosumab duration group. Conclusions: The available evidence for the benefit of denosumab in more aggressive giant cell tumors is inconclusive, and denosumab treatment may even be associated with an increase in the proportion of patients experiencing local recurrence. Because there are no randomized studies and the existing studies are of poor quality due to indication bias (the most aggressive Campanacci 3 lesions or those where even a resection would be difficult and result in morbidity are generally the patients who are treated with denosumab), the evidence to suggest a disadvantage is weak. Denosumab treatment should be viewed with caution until more definitive, randomized studies documenting a benefit (or not) have been conducted. Furthermore, we could not find evidence to suggest an appropriate length of preoperative denosumab before curettage.

Although mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs) are considered to be the cells of origin for most sarcomas, the role of MSCs as a source of tumor stroma is not fully understood in this tumor type. The current study investigated whether MSCs affect the tumor growth and metastatic ability in rat osteosarcoma model. Results from subcutaneous co-implantation of rat osteosarcoma COS1NR cells, established in our laboratory, with rat MSCs isolated from femur bone marrow showed that the incidence of tumor formation and tumor growth rate was higher until 5 weeks compared to COS1NR cell inoculation alone. However, no difference was observed in tumor growth afterwards and in the number of metastatic nodules at 9 weeks (0.75 vs. 1.2). Intravenous MSC injection at weeks 3 and 5 after subcutaneous inoculation of COS1NR cells significantly increased the number of lung nodules in the group with MSC injection compared to the group without MSC injection (17.33 vs. 2.0), while no difference was observed in subcutaneous tumor growth between those groups. Pathway analysis from gene expression profile identified that genes involved in focal adhesion, cytokine-cytokine receptor and extracellular matrix-receptor pathways such as CAMs (ICAM and VCAM)-integrins were highly expressed in MSCs, possibly participating in the tumor progression of osteosarcoma. These results suggest that MSCs could provide a source of microenvironments for osteosarcoma cells, and might enhance the ability of settlement and colonization which lead to early onset of growth and metastasis, possibly through their activated pathways interaction.

Malignant transformation of giant cell tumor of bone (GCTB) without radiotherapy exposure is exceptionally rare, occurring in less than 1% of GCTBs. The safety and efficacy of denosumab in patients with GCTB was recently reported. We herein report a case of a benign recurrent GCTB with an H3F3A mutation that underwent secondary malignant transformation during treatment with denosumab. A 29-year-old woman underwent curettage of a GCTB of the left ischium in 2005. Ten years after the first surgery, the GCTB recurred locally. We started treatment with denosumab. During the first 5 months of treatment, we observed a demarcated area of osteosclerosis in the recurrent lesion, and the patient’s clinical condition improved. At 6 months, however, the patient developed pain, and a rapidly growing mass was detected by computed tomography. An incisional biopsy was performed. Histologic analysis showed a high-grade osteosarcoma. The patient developed lung metastases and died soon after beginning chemotherapy. The mechanism of sarcomatous transformation of GCTB during denosumab therapy is unclear. These findings suggest that the scientific community should be aware of the possible malignant transformation of GCTB during denosumab treatment.